WSJ/NBC Poll: Very Promising for Obama

By Kelly Thomas - Posted on 10 December 2008

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News Poll has great news for Obama. He enjoys overwhelming support, even among those who did not vote for him. The majority of respondants support his cabinet picks. I think Amercans are collectively hopeful and understand what is at stake. Maybe they see that unity, not division, is what we need right now.

Two out of three respondents say they’re
pleased with Obama’s early appointments and three-fourths believe that
the level of his involvement in making policy has been exactly right.

Another
two-thirds view the president-elect in a positive light — a rating
that's more favorable than the numbers Bill Clinton and George W. Bush
received 1992 and 2000.

These
scores, combined with the fact that nearly 80 percent believe Obama
will face bigger challenges than other recent presidents have, seem to
have given the president-elect some early leeway with Americans, says
Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted this survey with
Democratic pollster Peter Hart.

“Compared
to Bill Clinton in ’93 or Bush in ’01, we’re seeing a president who has
been given a longer leash by the American public,” McInturff said.
“This is not a traditional start of a presidency where people give you
just a couple of months.”

I'm glad the polls say most of the public likes Obama's picks but a lot of people I talk to say they are disappointed with him because he's just "bringing back the Clinton crowd including Hillary herself! That's not change!!" What do you guys think of this argument?

We have serious issues facing us. Should Obama put newbies in office for some on the job training? How is that going to inspire confidence or allow Obama to hit the ground running on January 20? He's got to pick from the talent that's available who can produce results. For those who doubt this strategy, ask yourself what you would do if you were the president-elect in a situation like we're in today.

I think change is not in the faces selected but in the results achieved. So all the yappings about same Clinton folks, e.t.c, mean nothing until these people have done actual work that can be evaluated by the American people (not the press or washington lobbyists!). Until then, I am holding on to my faith in the hope of change by the incoming administration. Actually, the change has begun anyway as many have noted. We have a new president with genuine concern for the people of this country in general and is willing to do all in his power to get America back on track. A president that can multitask, speak in complete sentences, and is big on diplomacy. Yes, I do smell the change president-elect Barack Obama is cooking!

My reply is that Obama promised a change in the way government does business. He never mentioned a change in people. His choices are Bush people, Clinton people, or people with no experience at all. The Bush administration has been such a failure, that there are few that should be retained. No experience on too many levels would give us a government that doesn't know what they are supposed to do from one day to the next. That leaves Clinton people. It is up to Obama to make sure that they conduct themselves and their offices in the manner that he dictates. HE is the one that will bring the change to Washington.

I would say that the fallacy of that argument is in assuming that the Clinton people would make the same mistakes of the past, or that they would somehow ignore Obama and do their own things. First of all, there are several situations that demand attention that did not exist in Clinton's time, like the financial panic and the Iraq war-- one would be foolish to think that the appointees wouldn't first address these things responsibly. Second, we haven't seen how he governs yet, but we have seen how he managed his campaign, and that was a very tight ship even with the massive number of volunteers.

Finally, as Suzi said, the choices for his cabinet are limited to the past 2 administrations. That combines the experience needed to handle a new administration inheriting a number of time-sensitive situations, as well as knowledge recent enough to be at least marginally relevant-- this is especially important in foreign policy positions like the State Department.

----

And there's no sense crying over every mistakeYou just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.